Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 21:00:16 +0100 From: Pooh Bear <rabbitsfriendsandrelationsnospamail.com> Subject: Re: Regular gas in a 9.5?
Fred W wrote: > Johannes wrote: > > > > Pooh Bear wrote: > > > >>Fred W wrote: > >> > >> > >>>Richard Sutherland-Smith wrote: > >>> > >>>>>From there on out, you should probably use 89 octane in a linear. > >>>>>There is no such thing as "90" octane in the US. It is 87 (regular), 89 > >>>>>(mid-grade) and 91 to 93 (super/premium) depending on location. The > >>>>>small difference between the gas certified to be 89 (or better) and 90 > >>>>>is pretty insignificant. If you wanted to be anal about it you could > >>>>>squirt in a few gallons of premium fuel every tankful of mid-grade, but > >>>>>since the mid grade is at least 89 (most likely somewhat more) it is not > >>>>>a very big deal. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>Interesting, ain't it, our petrols over here are all unleaded and are > >>>>91, 96 and 98 octanes. My 9000 Aero likes 98 as recommended, but this > >>>>is not available everywhere, so it usually runs happily on 96. > >>> > >>>Ricky, > >>> > >>>Your talking RON, and we rebel yanks are talking PON (Pump Octane > >>>Numbers) which is RON+MON/2. So your 96 is our 89. But I'm not > >>>entirely sure of the happiness of my SAAB's engine either way... > >>> > >>>What is perhaps of interest (and maybe this was the point of you post) > >>>is that the bigger gap is between your "low grade" and your mid-grade. > >>>Why anyone would pay a big premium for 2 points of octane is a > >>>reasonable question. > >> > >>In the UK many places only sell 95 RON ( e.g. supermarkets ) with an > >>alternative 'superunleaded' being 97-98. > >> > >>95 is fine for most cars but some perfromance vehicles get some extra > >>performance from 97/98. > > > > > > My 9000 2.0 LPT also runs better on Shell Optimax 97 or 98? Less likely > > to stall at full acceleration. These premium fuels also have cleaning > > agents which are beneficial. > > Can't say about your fuel market, but the gasoline in the US claim to > have the same cleaning agents (detergents) these days regardless of > grade. Of course each manufacturer claims to have the best compared to > the competition, but do not differenciate premium anymore. > > I have not heard those claims of superior cleaning agents in "premium" > fuels in over a decade. Back in the 60's and 70's it used to be a big > marketing point... In the late 80s here Shell advertised its petrol as having superior additives. Unfortunately they didn't agree with all engines and some ended up with fouled valves IIRC ! Graham
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
